* The AP looks at concealed carry applications and the Cook County sheriff’s determination to weed out as many as he can…

In examining 2,000 of the first 5,000 applications, the department has flagged more than 120 that it will recommend Dart object to. The law allows objections for what it calls a “reasonable suspicion” that the applicants are dangerous even if their backgrounds would not automatically result in denials of their applications. Among those flagged by the Sheriff’s Department are a gang leader who has been arrested — though never convicted — a dozen times on aggravated battery with a dangerous weapon and other charges, and a man who was arrested but not convicted of domestic battery and endangering the life of a child. […]

In Cook County, Smith said “the numbers are so high” that to keep up, the 20-person unit assigned to investigate the applications would have to be tripled in size.

But state Rep. Brandon Phelps, a sponsor of the legislation, said 30 days is long enough for local law enforcement to submit objections to the state panel made up of former prosecutors, judges and others. He also says it isn’t necessary to provide additional funds since local law enforcement isn’t involved with issuing the permits.

Further, he and others said that because applicants have already passed background checks to obtain the state’s Firearm Owners Identification cards, the state could find itself in court if the panel upholds scores of local objections.

Keep pushing for an expedited process Brandon… and then watch what happens when a gang leader gets a permit and uses it to kill someone. It will destroy the credibility of concealed carry. If I were him, I would let Tom Dart deal with this in a reasonable way.

= watch what happens when a gang leader gets a permit and uses it to kill someone =

Rep. Phelps’ concern is still valid. How would a gang leader qualify for a FOID card, let alone a concealed carry permit?

And frankly, 120 out of 2,000 reviewed applications being flagged for objection isn’t that high of a figure, it’s only 6%. That doesn’t appear (to me at least) like Sheriff Dart is trying to block concealed carry in Cook County generally, it looks much more like Dart is following both the letter and the spirit of the law. What sort of objection rates are occurring in other counties?

@countyline 1:54 Yes, while many of them already carry guns, this would allow them to not get arrested if they get pulled over. It would also get them off the hook if they get in a gun battle and kill members of another gang. They would claim self defense and who could tell who shot first?

Sorry, Rich, your post appeared while I was typing. The gang leader with a record of multiple arrests, but no convictions, is exactly the sort of applicant that this concealed-carry objection process is supposed to flag. That gang leader would still be eligible for a FOID card, correct?

Barring someone who has been arrested but never convicted will simply encourage police to arrest suspected gang members in order to bar them from getting a CC permit later. Time for state’s attorney to get their acts together and prosecute cases. If they can’t win or won’t go forward, then the arrest should not count against you. wont and give up ste’s attorney

@Rahmsmiddle - you call a 90 day approval expedited? These permit seekers have pretty much been checked twice Lready. At the FOID process and most likely through the NICS database. I’m l for setting aside the Chicago apicatii a for this and let them take their time for approval. Put all the other counties ahead of Cook.

This is what happens when the courts coddle the gangs and give them that third or fourth chance to be a good citizen. No felony convictions and they are allowed a foid card. Now they want their cc permit.

I had a friend who was denied a CCW permit and is worried his FOID will get pulled. Apparently the State Police have some type of deeper records search now. My friend in 1968 plead guilty to illegal possession of a quantity of controlled drugs without intent to distribute which is a felony. He did no time for his plea and was on probation for only a short time.

He was shocked because he had served in the Army and had weapons training, has a FOID for years. Now he is in the process of having his record expunged because from 1968 to today he has never had another arrest, he was only 17 years only when he was arrested.

So at least based on this story I have to say apparently even very old conviction records are being digitalized and are being searched. I am not sure the State Police are doing such a superficial review.

I think many on our side were concerned Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart was going challenge a whole lot more than 6% of applicants, which is still a lot of people considering each of these applicants passed the initial rigorous background check to receive a Firearms Owners Identification Card in the first place.

If the best two cases for denying applications that they’ve got are the reputed gang member and the guy with a DV arrest but no conviction, I suspect those remaining 118 are very minor incidents indeed.

I wonder, if Garry McCarthy wasn’t the police superintendent for the City of Chicago, if Dart would challenge a Garry McCarthy application. After all, McCarthy was arrested in New Jersey (wasn’t it?) after a scuffle with some cops ticketing his daughter who called daddy. He also faced allegations of shooting out streetlights late at night while drunk with his brother - and then shouting epithets at neighbors coming out to see what was going on. Hence his nickname “streetlight assassin”.

In any event, the Governor’s “challenge” board is going to be busy, even if each case only takes a half-hour to consider each case.

We hope Dart will exercise good judgement in the end and use his challenges prudently and judiciously.

For all of Dart’s Hyperbole this is how it should work… This is what is in the law. Of course he points to the one gang leader, and notes 120 others have also been objected to. Some of these could have been a domestic arrest (but no conviction) from 30 years ago or some minor thing like a MisD drug bust as a teenager… but now the guy is in his 40’s with a clean record.

With that said: This is how the law is written. As for giving Dart more money because he is dealing with more applicants… I am pretty sure the Cook County Sheriffs budget is BY FAR the largest of any county in Illinois. Yes he has more apps, but he also has like the second or third largest sheriff’s dept in the entire COUNTRY with like 6000 or 7000 on staff. Compare that to Like Lasalle or Will county.

He isnt a CCW fan. Fine. But Raw numbers like “5000 permits! OMG” mean nothing. you need to look at per capita permit applications and compare him to other counties dealing with the same thing before he gets any tears.

As Sheriff Dart told a reporter a couple weeks ago, ‘After all, we’re not handing out party favors here.’ His common-sense approach to weeding out the potentially dangerous applicants makes good sense. Sure, the process should go more smoothly in counties like Edwards and Carroll, but we’re talking about Cook County folks.

“In Sangamon County, Undersheriff Jack Campbell said it’s unclear how long it will take to investigate the applications, or whether there could be legal ramifications from taking more than 30 days, which is a distinct possibility.”

I wonder what exactly the possible “legal ramifications” could be? Might it be that the taxpayer, by way of the sheriffs office, could have some type of liability if the sheriff fails to object to the CC application within the 30 days?

Whoa! The discussion is getting a bit extreme. The way the law was written (with all the checks) didn’t they stick their necks out if a bad one gets through? And there will only be a bad one discovered if they use it in poor judgement. I mean come on, is the Secretary of State responsible for every crash by a licensed driver? Guns and cars both can be deadly.

Look at the recent articles in the trib and times about what they think will happen when people fully have concealed carry. The media is worried that blood will run in the streets and shootouts will happen over road rage and parking spaces etc etc etc. No end to their fearfull stories and they bring in examples that don’t fit the pattern of law abiding citizens arming themselves in other states. Oh the inhumanity of it all!!!

What is to be Done…they are worried about a retired officer shooting some guy for texting while the movie is playing in a theater. Will you claim that retiree was “insane” at that moment, or provoked? The fear is real dude.

To the post, 6% hold rate is absolutely nothing. As several said above me, this is what the law contemplated.